I'm currently part of a small organization with a VMware setup that includes three hosts with internal storage and failover capabilities. I'm looking to migrate from VMware before our next renewal, and I'd like to make sure I'm on the right track. In our current environment, VMware serves three main purposes: it runs the VMs (which Hyper-V can do), provides VSAN storage across the hosts (which Hyper-V doesn't offer natively; I'm considering StarWind VSAN as an alternative), and it supplies a virtual switch (which Hyper-V also does). Am I missing any other key functions?
As for my migration plan, I'm thinking of the following steps:
1. Set up a temporary management host with Hyper-V and StarWind, configure them, and perform a test migration of a VM from VMware.
2. Move all VMs off Host1 onto Hosts 2 and 3.
3. Remove Host1 from the cluster, wipe it, install Windows Server and StarWind, then add it back into the Hyper-V/StarWind cluster. I'll migrate from Host2 next.
4. Repeat for Host3.
5. Finally, remove the temporary host from the environment.
I feel that Windows Server Standard should suffice, but I wonder if there are features in Datacenter that I might miss. Any insights would be appreciated!
5 Answers
I've actually had good experiences with S2D; I've used the legacy method before, but I'd now recommend Azure Local (formerly Azure Stack HCI). And you can license it with your existing Windows Server software assurance benefits, which is handy!
From a security standpoint, definitely set up Windows Server Core instead of GUI. It'll cut down your attack surface significantly. It's shocking how many Hyper-V hosts run unnecessary GUI applications that shouldn't be there.
I used Core a long time ago and it was a nightmare, but maybe it’s improved? I guess I could *consider* it.
StarWind VSAN is fantastic! I've been using it in a two-node Hyper-V cluster for a long time and have only faced one real issue, which their support resolved quickly. Your migration plan looks solid, and unless you're concerned about licensing, you probably won't need the Datacenter version unless you have a lot of Windows VMs running on each host.
Do you mind sharing how much you're paying for StarWind? I'm just curious since I have a quote request in, but I'd love some insight!
Thanks for the feedback! Always great to hear another positive opinion on StarWind.
If you plan to run more than two Windows VMs per host, you're going to want Datacenter licensing. This way, you avoid the hassle of paying for separate Standard licenses for multiple VMs on each host. Datacenter can be more cost-effective if you're running several VMs. Just something to consider!
I think with Standard you need to relicense the cores every time for each pair of VMs. So while it's technically possible to just get more Standard licenses, it wouldn’t be compliant.
Exactly! Microsoft licensing can be tricky, and it's better to stick with the proper licenses to stay compliant.
Datacenter licensing really comes down to VM density. If you're under that economic density threshold, then stick with Standard. It all depends on how many VMs you plan to run on each host. Are you using a proper SAN or just relying on local storage?
Well, not really a SAN in the traditional sense; each host has lots of disks but they're all showing up in VMware's environment, kind of creating a makeshift shared storage setup.
Just make sure you're aware of the limitations of your current hardware when considering S2D or any other solution!
So true! Admins need to be vigilant about how they set up their Hyper-V hosts.